Re King - [2018] VSC 644

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S CR 2018 0286

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977
and
IN THE MATTER of an application for bail by Sean Joseph KING

---

JUDGE:	Champion J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	26 November 2018
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	3 December 2018
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re King
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2018] VSC 644

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Application for bail – Charges of acquiring traffickable quantity of firearms, prohibited person possessing firearms, committing indictable offence whilst on bail, possessing prohibited weapon, possessing drug of dependence, dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime, possessing cartridge ammunition without licence, dealing with unauthorised explosive without approval, prohibited person possessing silencer, attempting to commit indictable offence, attempting to commit indictable offence whilst on bail, non–prohibited person possessing category E handgun, negligently dealing with proceeds of crime, manufacturing firearms not category A or B whilst unlicensed, possessing traffickable quantity of unregistered firearms, disposing of category E handgun to non-firearms dealer, disposing of general category handgun to non-firearms dealer, importation of tier 2 goods - Compelling reason test – Substance abuse – Treatment available – Delay – Relevant criminal history – Previous grant of bail – Bail refused – Bail Act 1977.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Mr S Gardner	Pica Criminal Lawyers
For the Respondent	Ms S Thomas	Office of Public Prosecutions

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction

On 17 April 2018, Sean King (‘the applicant’) was arrested and charged with 38 offences, alleged to have occurred between 28 December 2017 and 27 April 2018.

In summary, the offences alleged concern the trafficking and sale of firearms to a covert police member on 28 December 2017 and 12 April 2018 and four instances of importation of firearm parts. Additionally, on 17 April 2018 and 7 May 2018, search warrants were executed at three properties, locating a large number of firearms, firearm parts, ammunition, drugs of dependence and machinery capable of manufacturing firearms and firearm parts. The co-accused, Rajeev Singh, will plead guilty to a number of firearm charges at the County Court on 11 February 2019.

The applicant was on bail at the time of committing some of the alleged offences, between 28 December 2017 and 19 February 2018. This was for charges of possessing unregistered handguns (two counts) and possessing a drug of dependence (two counts). Those charges were finalised on 19 February 2018 and the applicant was found guilty of one count of possessing an unregistered handgun. He was fined $4,000 without conviction, becoming a person prohibited from possessing a firearm.

On 23 October 2018, the applicant was refused bail for the current charges in the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court. By an application dated 2 November 2018, he applied to this Court for a grant of bail.

The charges

The applicant has been charged with the following 38 offences:

·acquiring a traffickable quantity of firearms;
·being a prohibited person possessing firearms (ten counts);
·committing an indictable offence…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Re King

Details

AGLC: Re King [2018] VSC 644
Case: [2018] VSC 644
Decision Date: 3 December 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter of Re King involved the defendant, who was facing a series of serious charges including illegal firearms possession, drug offences, and dealing with suspected proceeds of crime. The case was heard in the Magistrates' Court of Victoria. The defendant sought bail under the Bail Act 1977, arguing that there were compelling reasons for his release pending trial. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the severity and number of charges, the defendant’s criminal history, and the potential danger he posed to the community.

The court had to decide whether the compelling reasons test, as outlined in the Bail Act, was satisfied. This involved assessing the nature and seriousness of the charges, the likelihood of the defendant appearing in court if released on bail, and the potential risk to the community. The court also considered the defendant's substance abuse issues, the availability of treatment options, the delay in the trial process, and his previous criminal history, including instances where bail had been previously granted but subsequently breached. The court's reasoning focused on the gravity of the offences, the defendant's criminal history, and the risk of reoffending if released on bail.

After weighing all these factors, the court concluded that the compelling reasons test was not met. The severity of the charges, combined with the defendant's history of breaching bail conditions, led the court to determine that bail should be refused. The court emphasised that the potential danger to the community and the risk of reoffending outweighed any arguments for bail. As a result, the defendant's application for bail was dismissed.

Orders